Dr. John’s Wishful is a blog where stories, struggles, and hopes for a better nation come alive. It blends personal reflections with social commentary, turning everyday experiences into insights on democracy, unity, and integrity. More than critique, it is a voice of hope—reminding readers that words can inspire change, truth can challenge power, and dreams can guide Filipinos toward a future of justice and nationhood.

Tuesday, September 30, 2025

Sympathy in Philippine Politics: From Ninoy to Digong, From Cory to Sara

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD

I have been observing how this government maneuvers its way around the delicate issue of former President Rodrigo Duterte and the cases filed against him in the International Criminal Court. To me, it is clear: they will never allow Digong to die in The Hague. They will even go to extraordinary lengths to prolong his life. Why? Because they know the political consequences of such a death.
 
If Digong were to pass away in a foreign cell, under the custody of international judges, it would not just be a legal tragedy—it would be a political earthquake. His death in The Hague would transform him from a controversial leader into a symbol of national humiliation, a Filipino president who died away from his own land, judged by foreigners. The Filipino psyche, bound deeply by notions of loyalty and honor, would not take this sitting down.
 
And in that moment, all the political attacks and smear campaigns against Vice President Sara Duterte would suddenly look trivial, even irrelevant. The people’s sympathy would swell toward her, not simply because she is his daughter, but because she would represent continuity, defiance, and pride. The death of Digong in such a place would immortalize his name in the minds of his loyalists and, more importantly, cast Sara as the rightful heir to the struggle.
 
We have seen this pattern before in our history. When Ninoy Aquino was assassinated in 1983, it ignited a firestorm of anger and sympathy that propelled his widow, Cory Aquino, to the presidency in 1986. Years later, when Cory passed away in 2009, the political landscape was instantly reshaped. At that time, Mar Roxas was the sure standard-bearer for the Liberal Party in 2010, but the nation’s outpouring of grief for Cory catapulted her son, Noynoy Aquino, into the presidency instead. In the span of days, sympathy shifted the weight of history and changed the country’s political destiny.
 
Even Joseph “Erap” Estrada offers a telling example. Ousted in 2001 through People Power II and later convicted of plunder, he might have been written off as politically finished. Yet, public sympathy for his downfall kept him alive in the hearts of many Filipinos. By 2010, less than a decade after his ouster, he nearly pulled off a stunning comeback, finishing a strong second in the presidential race. His resilience proved that once the masses feel an injustice—real or perceived—no legal judgment can fully erase a leader’s influence.
 
What is even more striking is how that sympathy extended beyond Estrada himself. His wife, Loi Ejercito Estrada, was swept into the Senate in 2001, just months after his removal from Malacañang. Later on, his sons, Jinggoy Estrada and JV Ejercito, also captured seats in the Senate. This shows that sympathy, once ignited, can nourish an entire political clan, carrying the family name forward even when its patriarch has fallen.
 
And then came Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. After decades of exile, humiliation, and relentless criticism of his family’s legacy, he turned the tide of public opinion. The narrative of being wronged, of being unfairly vilified, resonated with millions. In 2022, that long-cultivated sympathy and sense of redemption culminated in his election as President of the Republic of the Philippines—a landslide victory that would have seemed unthinkable in the years immediately after the 1986 People Power Revolution.
 
These examples all point to one undeniable truth: in Philippine politics, sympathy can transform grief into victory, and humiliation into redemption. Ninoy’s death gave Cory the presidency. Cory’s death gave Noynoy the presidency. Erap’s downfall gave rise to his wife and sons in the Senate. Marcos’ fall eventually brought Bongbong back to Malacañang. By the same pattern, if Digong were to meet his end in The Hague, Sara Duterte’s path to Malacañang in 2028 would not just be possible—it would be inevitable.
 
That is why, no matter what this administration does—whether it is calculated investigations, political isolation, or attempts to clip her wings—the political tide would turn. The sympathy vote alone would carry Sara straight to Malacañang in 2028. It would not just be a strong chance; it would be a sure victory.
 
History has shown us, time and again, that Filipinos rally around leaders who are perceived to have been wronged or humiliated. Sympathy in Philippine politics is like wildfire—it begins with a spark, spreads beyond one person, and consumes the nation’s heart. Once it catches flame, no amount of effort can contain it. Should Digong’s story end in The Hague, Sara’s story in 2028 begins not as a possibility, but as destiny.
 

___________________

 *About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academicpublic intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, managementeconomicsdoctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

Monday, September 29, 2025

The Flood of Truths is Yet to Come to Kontrabidas When You Challenge Ping Lacson

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD

 


My daughter Juliana Rizalhea and I were curled up watching Kontrabida Academy on Netflix when a line pierced my heart: history was described as digging up the dirt on people, or uncovering skeletons in the closet. That simple, almost harsh truth stayed with me long after the screen went dark. Because, really, history isn’t just about celebrating shining heroes—it’s about staring bravely into the faces of villains, the “Na Felling-Bida” who twist emotions and weave lies, and all the other kontrabida we’d rather pretend don’t exist. Sometimes, the most heartbreaking “kontrabida” isn’t the villain everyone points at but the one who ruins the carefully written script, revealing those who hide behind the “Barong Tagalog” while covering up their sins, walking away untouched. And it’s exactly this kind of kontrabida—the one who spoils the story—that we must learn to recognize and understand.

This is who Senator Ping Lacson, Chairman of the Senate BlueRibbon Committee, has become in our public life: the kontrabida of all kontrabidas. A proud graduate of the Philippine Military Academy Class of ’71, a former Chief of the Philippine National Police, and a lawmaker with decades of experience in the Senate, Lacson has proven himself time and again to be an untiring investigator—relentlessly digging beneath the surface to expose truths many would rather keep hidden, fearlessly confronting powerful elites, unraveling webs of deception, and shaking the foundations of the very institutions some believe untouchable.

I say this not only as an observer of politics but also as an educator who has taught men who are now respected leaders in the Philippine National Police. Many of my former students, as well as close friends in uniformed service within the AFP and PNP, often shared their admiration for then PNP Chief Panfilo “Ping” Lacson. They spoke of his discipline, integrity, and no-nonsense leadership that earned both fear and respect in equal measure. In their stories, Lacson was remembered not as a man who demanded loyalty, but as a leader who inspired it through example. That, to me, is a rare kind of respect—one that cannot be bought or faked. Retired Police Major General Thompson Lantion, PMA Class of ’69, echoed this sentiment, describing Ping Lacson as a leader whose unwavering commitment to discipline and justice left an indelible mark on the institution and on those who served under him.

And now comes this weathered grandfather, a neophyte senator—old in years but new to the Senate—puffed up with arrogance, strutting around like a know-it-all in law and investigation, as if age alone bestows wisdom. In his arrogance, he sought to cast doubt on Lacson’s fitness to lead the Blue-Ribbon Committee. But in doing so, he has effectively signed an invisible waiver, giving Lacson every reason to dig deep into his past. Worse still, this grandfather neophyte has revealed his true colors: he is blatantly defending and lawyering for the self-confessed plunderer construction firm owners. Only the blind—or the willfully ignorant—cannot see it.

This senator carries himself as though he is the most intelligent in the chamber. He nitpicks at every statement of his colleagues, interrupts them, corrects them, as if no one else could possibly measure up to his self-proclaimed brilliance. But arrogance has a way of blinding men to their own vulnerabilities. In challenging the integrity, intelligence, and legacy of Ping Lacson, he has forgotten one thing: skeletons don’t stay buried forever, especially when Ping Lacson is the one holding the spade.

So do not be surprised. In the coming days expect more dirt, more odor, and more bad secrets to surface about this neophyte senator. He would be wise to prepare not by plotting attacks, but by making sure his own record can withstand scrutiny—because the alternative is obvious: he will be forced to twist and deflect, attempting to turn fresh facts into lies to protect himself. And the public will watch whether those defenses hold or only deepen the wound.

When you challenge him, do not expect silence. Expect more. Expect revelations. Expect that what was hidden will be dragged into the light, no matter how tightly locked the closet doors may seem. For Senator Ping Lacson, PMA graduate, former Chief of the PNP, and veteran lawmaker, plays the kontrabida not for himself, but for a people tired of being deceived. In a political landscape where so many villains prosper, he is the rare kontrabida who ruins the villains’ game.

____________

 *About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academicpublic intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, managementeconomicsdoctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

Sunday, September 28, 2025

A Chance for Tamayo and Magalong: The Pendulum of Philippine Politics and the Prospect of 2028

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD

Philippine politics has always moved like a pendulum, swinging back and forth in response to the failures and excesses of those in power. If massive corruption continues to dominate our national narrative until 2027, then by 2028 it is almost certain that the political mood will shift toward a leader who embodies anti-corruption and good governance. This is the pattern we have seen repeatedly in our history. After the authoritarian rule of Marcos Sr., the people turned to Cory Aquino, who symbolized honesty and democracy. After the corruption scandals of Joseph Estrada, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo stepped in as a stabilizer. When Arroyo herself was tainted by controversy, Noynoy Aquino rose to power with the rallying cry, “Kung walangcorrupt, walang mahirap.” Each leadership choice was less about ideology and more about reaction—the people seeking the opposite of what had failed them before.

If the flood control scam, questionable deals, and misuse of public funds continue to define this administration’s legacy, the next election will be shaped by outrage and the longing for integrity. It is in this political atmosphere that someone like Baguio City Mayor Benjie Magalong could emerge as a natural beneficiary of the people’s frustration. Magalong has consistently built a reputation as a reformist leader, unafraid to challenge entrenched interests. As a police general, he is best remembered for his courage in leading the Mamasapano Board of Inquiry in 2015, where he spoke truth to power and revealed uncomfortable facts about command responsibility. That act of integrity cost him politically within the police hierarchy, but it won him the respect of many Filipinos who saw in him a rare official who put truth above careerism. As mayor of Baguio, he has continued to uphold transparency, accountability, and discipline, making good governance more than just a slogan.

But Magalong may not be alone in this reformist lane. Gov. Reynaldo Tamayo Jr. of South Cotabato could emerge as a dark horse in 2028. Unlike the traditional political heavyweights, Tamayo has quietly built his image as a pragmatic provincial leader who delivers results without the noise of national theatrics. His leadership has now expanded beyond his province: he was reelected as President of the League of Provinces of the Philippines (LPP) and continues to serve as Chairman of the Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP), positions that grant him both national visibility and influence among governors, mayors, and local officials across the country. Coupled with his role as national president of the Partido Federal ng Pilipinas, Tamayo now sits at the center of a powerful network of local executives. Add to this his track record in South Cotabato, particularly his free education initiatives, and he presents himself as a credible grassroots-oriented alternative. His relatively quiet demeanor compared to louder national figures could become his strength, especially if the electorate grows weary of traditional dynastic personalities.

If the country enters 2028 drowning in scandals and disillusionment, candidates like Magalong and Tamayo represent a different kind of leadership—grounded in discipline, honesty, and public service rather than entrenched political privilege. They may not have the machinery of dynasties, but they carry something potentially more powerful: credibility. That credibility could resonate strongly with an electorate tired of recycled names and promises.

Still, the bigger challenge lies not in the emergence of leaders, but in the maturity of the electorate. The pendulum will swing, yes—but where it lands will depend on the Filipino people’s ability to distinguish between genuine reformers and populists who only wear the mask of integrity. Our nation has been betrayed before by leaders who promised change but delivered the same politics of self-interest. If Filipinos truly want 2028 to be a turning point, we must go beyond slogans and personalities. We must demand a government that acts, not just talks; that delivers reforms, not just rhetoric.

In the end, the possibility of a Magalong or a Tamayo candidacy is not simply about two men’s leadership—it is about whether the Filipino people are finally ready to reward honesty and competence with the highest office of the land. If corruption continues unchecked, the demand for integrity will define the next elections. And perhaps, just perhaps, the pendulum will swing in favor of true reform.

  ____________

 *About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academicpublic intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, managementeconomicsdoctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

Watching the Forgery Unfold in the Senate: A Nation Held Hostage

 *Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD

I was sitting in my home office room while my daughter Juliana Rizalhea was busy in her Taekwondo training on the floor stretching her legs, the television humming in the background, when the spectacle began. It was supposed to be a hearing—a solemn exercise of truth and accountability. But as I watched the cameras zoom in on the so-called witness, clutching notarized statements like weapons, I felt the air change. Something was wrong. The words rolling off his tongue did not carry the weight of honesty; they carried the stench of fabrication.

I leaned closer to the screen, half in disbelief, half in anger. Here it was again—the old trick of Philippine politics. Falsified documents paraded as gospel truth, testimonies rehearsed in backrooms now dressed up as revelations under oath. It wasn’t the pursuit of justice I was seeing; it was a cheap play, staged for cameras, orchestrated for political ends.

And this is what pains me most: every Filipino wants the true mastermind of the flood control scandal to be jailed. We all want accountability for the billions stolen and the lives destroyed by ghost projects and substandard works. But not like this—not through fake evidence and planted witnesses. For to use forgery in the name of justice is to mock justice itself. It does not jail the guilty; it frees them. It does not expose the truth; it buries it beneath layers of deceit.

As the session dragged on, I could not help but ask myself: how many times have we seen this before? How many investigations have been poisoned by forged papers, notarized lies, and the prostitution of truth? How many institutions have been dragged down, not by evidence, but by the fabrication of it?

And the ones who preside over these lies—they wear barong, they carry titles, they speak the language of law. Yet what they truly are, I realized, are forgers. Not legislators, not truth-seekers, but forgers in barong. They manufacture deceit the way others draft bills, and they do it with the confidence of men who know they will get away with it.

Sitting there, I felt the weight of betrayal. Our democracy was not being defended; it was being defiled, live on national television. What struck me most was not only the brazenness of the forgery, but the silence in the room—the nods, the complicit stares, the absence of outrage. Lies were being legitimized by the very people sworn to protect the truth.

This is the rot that has taken root in our politics. It is not just about corruption anymore; it is about the normalization of deceit. A forged paper today, a falsified witness tomorrow—until, one day, truth itself becomes irrelevant. And when that day comes, what will be left of our democracy?

As the hearing ended, I switched off the television. But the image of that witness, clutching his notarized lies, stayed with me. It was not just a scene from the Senate floor—it was a mirror held up to our nation. A reminder that unless we demand accountability, unless we spit out the forgers who rot in their barongs, we will continue to be held hostage by lies.

Yes, we want the guilty jailed. But we want them jailed through truth—not through fabrications. Only then can justice be real. Only then can democracy survive.

   ____________

 *About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academicpublic intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, managementeconomicsdoctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

Friday, September 26, 2025

Filibustering: A Deterrent to National Development

*Dr.  Rodolfo JohnOrtiz Teope, PhD, EdD

The other day, while driving along Mindanao Avenue corner Congressional Avenue, I found myself slowing down at the sight of beggars crowding both sides of the road. Children with dusty faces tapped on car windows. Mothers cradled infants in their arms, whispering words of comfort that did little to mask the hunger etched on their faces. Fathers, their eyes tired and defeated, stood quietly, holding out their hands, hoping for just a few coins. In that moment, I realized they cared nothing about the heated debates in the Senate or the flood control scam dominating the news. They only cared about one thing: survival. Will they eat tonight? That was the only question that mattered to them.

When I got home and turned on the television, the contrast hit me like a wall. What I saw was not about poverty, or hunger, or jobs. What I saw was filibustering—senators speaking endlessly, stretching debates with technicalities, drowning each other with words. I listened for solutions but heard only delay. I watched for progress but saw only obstruction. And it struck me: while those beggars wait for food, while families wait for jobs and classrooms, our leaders waste precious hours protecting themselves and their allies through endless speeches that go nowhere.

Filibustering, I realized, is not just about wasting time. It is about wasting lives. Every hour spent in grandstanding is an hour stolen from the poor. Every day consumed by legal gymnastics is a day when no law is passed to put rice on tables or roofs over heads. Those who stand at the rostrum may think their voices are powerful, but to the Filipino people outside, those voices are a wall—a barrier that blocks the solutions they so desperately need.

I thought of the missing sabungeros whose families still wait for justice, of children squeezed in overcrowded classrooms, of farmers tilling the land without support, of hospitals that cannot heal because resources are scarce. These are the real stories that demand attention, yet they are drowned in the noise of filibustering. Instead of urgency, we get delay. Instead of decisions, we get distractions. And in the end, the people who suffer most are the ones who were never even part of the conversation.

And this is not theoretical. We saw it in the blue-ribbon hearings, where hours upon hours were consumed by privilege speeches that strayed from the issue, often weaponized to defend allies implicated in corruption. We saw it in debates over the national budget, where instead of hammering out solutions for education, health, and jobs, senators buried the discussions in repetitive arguments, delaying disbursement of funds critical to social services. Even during impeachment proceedings in past years, filibustering became a tactic to stall the inevitable, with speeches longer than court testimonies, not for the sake of truth but for the sake of survival. In all these instances, filibustering was not a shield for democracy—it was a sword pointed at the heart of national development.

The more I watched, the more I saw how filibustering has become a weapon. It is used not to clarify but to confuse, not to enlighten but to obscure, not to protect the people but to shield the plunderers. The Senate, meant to be a place of service, often feels like a theater where political survival is the main performance. The poor remain outside the gates, unheard and unseen, while debates inside circle endlessly, producing nothing but frustration.

And yet, I cannot help but think of the greater tragedy behind it all. Every time filibustering takes the stage, the nation loses focus. The cameras follow the speeches, the headlines cover the drama, and the people are led to believe something meaningful is happening. But it is an illusion. The truth is that filibustering is a distraction, a way to buy time, to bury accountability, to prevent decisions from being made. And while we are distracted, hunger grows, poverty deepens, and hope withers.

This is why I return to the doctrine of Timpuyog Pilipinas: to love rather than hate, to unite rather than divide, and to build rather than destroy. I think of it often when I watch our leaders. Filibustering embodies the very opposite. It divides instead of unites. It destroys time instead of building solutions. It feeds on hate and suspicion instead of compassion and service. It has become a mirror of what politics should never be.

And so I ask: how long must the Filipino people wait? How long must that child on Mindanao Avenue wait for food while senators argue endlessly? How long must the farmer wait for support while privilege speeches consume session hours? How long must teachers wait for classrooms, workers wait for jobs, mothers wait in hospitals with no doctors, while filibustering continues to block the path to development?

I cannot accept that this is the kind of democracy we must endure. I cannot accept that delay and obstruction should define the lives of millions. If senators continue to waste time in speeches that serve no one but themselves, history will not remember the words they spoke—it will remember the hunger they ignored, the poverty they prolonged, and the nation they abandoned.

Filibustering is more than a parliamentary tactic; it is a betrayal. It is the theft of time, of opportunity, of progress. It is the reason why, while the world moves forward, our nation remains stuck. The people do not ask for perfection. They ask for food, for jobs, for education, for justice. These are not luxuries; they are the very essence of governance. And every day that filibustering delays action, those promises slip further away.

For me, the choice is simple. Our leaders must abandon obstruction and embrace service. They must rise above politics and finally see the faces outside their halls—the hungry child, the weary worker, the forgotten Filipino. Because when politics distracts, the nation suffers. And when filibustering replaces leadership, the nation is betrayed.

The time for endless debate is over. The time for national development is now.

  ____________

 *About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academicpublic intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, managementeconomicsdoctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.


Urgency of Reform: Cabinet Overhaul and a Constitutional Convention for a Dignified Philippines

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD


As I drove through the flood-prone areas of Barangay Tumana in Marikina on my way to a meeting at Gateway Mall in Cubao, Quezon City, I felt the crushing weight of our nation’s sorrow. The sight of communities constantly vulnerable to rising waters reminded me of a painful truth: the very agency tasked with preventing such suffering—the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH)—has betrayed its mission.

DPWH, entrusted with building our roads, bridges, and flood control systems, should be a shield for the people. Instead, the flood control scandal has exposed it as a breeding ground for corruption. What used to be whispers about undersecretaries, congressmen, and contractors has now reached senators themselves. Tomorrow, it may spread further still.

This is not merely about one project or one administration. DPWH is the backbone of our nation’s infrastructure, responsible for billions in taxpayer funds. But when those funds are stolen, when flood control becomes flood profiteering, it is not only communities like Tumana that drown—it is the people’s faith in government itself. Corruption here is no passing scandal. It is a disease that has outlived presidents, thrived across terms, and eaten its way into the very heart of the system.

And then comes the hardest blow: the Speaker of the House, the fourth most powerful figure in government, accused as mastermind. A bodyguard—just a man tasked to protect his boss—stood as witness to suitcases full of billions, money carried like ordinary cargo. Meanwhile, the poor line up for jobs, scrape for a day’s wage, and hope to bring home a little food. While one mother counts coins for rice, these politicians count billions in cash. Tell me, how can one not feel betrayed?

On September 21, the people shouted back. They filled the streets, angry but determined. It was not a rally for any candidate or a call to seat the Vice President—it was a cry against corruption itself. A plea for dignity. But this is not just about the legislature. Long before, the judiciary had already lost the people’s trust when it brushed aside the impeachment case of Vice President Sara Duterte. And now the legislature joins the fall. What happens when both our lawmakers and our judges are distrusted? What faith is left for the Filipino?

The betrayal goes deeper. Undersecretaries, district engineers, and even the Executive Secretary—our so-called “Little President”—are named in testimonies. If even the President’s right hand is implicated, who else is compromised? Who else has dipped their fingers into the people’s coffers? Ordinary Filipinos are left to ask: is there anyone left in government we can trust?

I hear the desperation growing. In Mendiola, there were voices that shouted: burn Malacañang, start a revolution. Some look to Nepal, where the people themselves tore down a corrupt system and forced a new face of leadership, a new constitution, through violent mass action. For now, our country has been spared such violence because Filipinos still hold on to faith in God and process. But let us not fool ourselves—if no change comes, if no reform begins, then the fire of desperation will grow hotter. The day may come when people no longer wait for process, when they themselves will force a reckoning.

And that thought chills me. Because while one child begs in the streets for food, while a father breaks his back for 200 or 400 pesos a day, while families count every peso just to survive, these leaders smuggle away wealth that cannot be earned even in a hundred lifetimes. Suitcases of money. Billions carried like bags of rice. How can this not push people to the brink?

Mr. President, the burden is on you. You still have time, but not much. If you want the people to believe again, if you want to salvage even a fragment of trust, start by facing your own house. Replace your Cabinet. Sweep away those who abuse your trust and use their offices as dens of theft. 2028 is not far, (unless there will be a snap election.) What legacy will you leave? A nation gasping in betrayal—or a nation that remembers you as the leader who dared to clean his own ranks?

But let me be honest: replacing Cabinet members will not heal everything. The rot is not just in the names. It is in the system, in the Constitution itself. This Constitution was built to shield oligarchs, to protect dynasties, to enrich the rich and bury the poor. It even safeguards foreign interests before Filipino dignity. As long as this Constitution lives, the cycle of plunder will continue.

That is why reform must be twofold. First, change the Cabinet. Show the people that integrity and competence, not loyalty and politics, are your measure. Second, call for a Constitutional Convention. But not one filled with politicians—for if they write our future, they will only write their own protection. Let the sectors of society—the youth, the farmers, the workers, the women, the marginalized—be the architects of our new charter. Only then can we build a constitution truly born of the people.

This is the choice before you, Mr. President if only you can hear me. I am pleading. Change your Cabinet, call for a Convention, or risk letting history choose for you. If you delay, if you protect the corrupt, if you hide behind silence, then do not be surprised if the people themselves follow Nepal’s path. Because a hungry, betrayed, and enraged nation will not stay silent forever.

We stand now at a crossroad. Either we act with courage and dignity—or we are swept away by chaos and rage. Let us choose reform before reform is forced upon us. Let us choose peace before violence chooses us.

The Philippines cannot remain bound to betrayal. It is time for courage. It is time for reform. It is time to prove that this nation, wounded as it is, still deserves dignity.

 ___________

 *About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academicpublic intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, managementeconomicsdoctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.


Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

Blog Archive

Search This Blog